throbber
Filed on behalf of The Gillette Company
`By: David L. Cavanaugh, Reg. No. 36,476
`
`Yung-Hoon Ha, Reg. No. 56,368
`
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
`
`1875 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
`
`Washington, DC 20006
`Tel: (202) 663-6000
`Email: David.Cavanaugh@wilmerhale.com
`Yung-Hoon.Ha@wilmerhale.com
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________________________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________________________________
`
`The Gillette Company, Fujitsu Semiconductor Limited, and Fujitsu Semiconductor
`America, Inc.
`Petitioners,
`
`
`v.
`
`Zond, LLC.
`Patent Owner of U.S. Patent No. 6,896,775
`
`Trial No. IPR2014-006041
`
`
`
`PETITIONERS’ DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`
`
`1 Case IPR2014-01482 has been joined with the instant proceeding.
`
`
`
`

`
`1
`
`May 26, 2015
`
`IPR2014-604 (joined with IPR2014-01482)
`
`IPR2014-578 (joined with IPR2014-01494) and
`
`Zond, LLC.
`
`v.
`
`Semiconductor America, Inc.
`
`The Gillette Company, Fujitsu Semiconductor Limited, and Fujitsu
`
`The ’775 Patent:
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`

`
`2
`
`•Conclusion
`
`•Issues Raised by Patent Owner
`
`•The Instituted Combinations
`
`•Overview of the ‘775 Patent
`
`Overview
`
`

`
`3
`
`US Patent 6,896,775, IPR2014-578, Ex. 1001
`
`The ’775 Patent
`
`

`
`4
`
`‘775 Patent, Fig. 2, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1001 (with annotations)
`
`substrate(211)
`Bias provided to
`
`dotted region (245/246)
`Plasma generated in
`
`supply(234)
`(216) through pulsed power
`anode(238) and cathode
`Electrical pulse applied across
`
`permanent magnets (256)
`Magnetic field applied using
`
`processing apparatus"
`enhanced plasma
`Relates to "magnetically
`The ’775 Patent
`
`

`
`5
`
`‘775 Patent, Fig. 5, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1001 (with annotations)
`
`Power pulse (324)
`
`Current pulse (322)
`
`Voltage pulse (320)
`
`The ’775 Patent
`
`

`
`6
`
`‘775 Patent, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1001
`
`Representative Independent Claims 1 and 15
`The ’775 Patent
`
`

`
`7
`
`Decision on Institution, IPR2014-604, Paper No. 9
`
`Decision on Institution, IPR2014-578, Paper No. 13
`
`Petitioner would prevail based on the following grounds:
`The Board found that there is a reasonable likelihood that
`
`Board’s Decisions on Institution
`
`

`
`8
`
`•“means for applying a bias voltage”
`•“means for exchanging”
`•“means for applying an electrical field [or pulse]”
`•“means for generating a magnetic field”
`•“means for ionizing a [volume of] feed gas”
`•“ionizing a feed gas”
`•“strongly-ionized plasma”
`•“weakly-ionized plasma”
`
`There is no dispute as to the constructions adopted by the Board
`
`Adopted by the Board
`Patent Owner Does Not Challenge Construction
`
`

`
`9
`
`))
`
`tti
`
`Wang, Fig. 1, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1008 (with annotations)
`
`ithh
`
`Fi1IPR201400578E1008((
`
`W
`
`Bias provided to substrate (20)
`
`rotates with magnetron
`
`-e.g. dotted region (42), which
`by pulsed DC supply (80)
`Plasma generated below cathode
`
`anode(24) and cathode(14)
`Electrical pulse applied across
`
`rotatable magnetron (40)
`Magnetic field applied using
`
`Applied Prior Art: Wang
`
`

`
`Ex. 1008 (with annotations)
`Wang, Fig. 1, IPR2014-00578,
`
`
`
`\mx8e-Eemm&‘Hd:§§s\mx8e-EemmE‘N.3€38RbH.wESQm=o:mo_:m
`
`Ex. 1001 (with annotations)
`‘775 Patent, Fig. 2, IPR2014-00578,
`
`10
`
`o—
`
`
`
`?:o:Eo::cES;M63.5«m:o:Eo::cES;Sew.xm
`
`
`
`_ow:2¢:¢muEmu_._
`
`supply
`
`>_o_o_:m
`
`Pulsed power
`
`
`
`3>>oo__owm_:._
`
`cathode
`
`m_oo.=_ou
`
`anode
`
`wvocc
`
`magnet
`
`_m:maE
`
`.1.
`,%In
`J.?
`W,
`
` dW\\.m.&.V§\\.\
`
`\‘&§
`
`Wang
`
`‘775 Patent
`
`E33mk.
`
`The ’775 Patent and ’382 Patent (Wang)
`
`
`
`
`
`3:52:=_2..._Sn..2...E25,.mk.2:
`
`in dotted region
`Plasma generated
`
`
`
` firm.»E:o_m2_o¢=o_oEL
`
`Sam
`
`
`
`
`
`1+O.mu%_zOD9._om_o_>o.o_mo_m_
`
`substrate (20)
`Bias provided to
`
`
`
`

`
`11
`
`Wang, Figs. 6 and 7, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1008 (with annotations)
`
`Wang, 7:13-17, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1008
`
`(seeFigure 6)
`Power pulse
`
`Wang, 7:61-63, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1008
`
`(seeFigure 7)
`Voltage pulse
`
`Applied Prior Art: Wang
`
`

`
`12
`
`Ex. 1001 (with annotations)
`‘775 Patent, Fig. 5, IPR2014-578,
`
`HartsoughTr. 149:25 –150:6, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1030
`
`…
`
`A.Yes.
`
`Do you see that?
`in the maintenance phase."
`voltage and substantial current
`ignition phase and a lower
`and almost no current in the
`will output relatively high voltage
`
`Q."A typical pulsed power supply
`
`Phase
`Maintenance
`
`Phase
`Ignition
`
`•Dr. Hartsoughadmits that Fig. 5 of the ‘775 patent discloses
`
`the output of Wang’s typical pulsed power supply
`
`Applied Prior Art: Wang
`
`

`
`13
`
`Ex. 1001 (with annotations)
`‘775 Patent, Fig. 5, IPR2014-578,
`
`HartsoughTr. 150:7-9, 17-20; IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1030
`
`A. Yes.
`
`right?
`of the '775 patent is showing;
`
`Q.And that's exactly what Figure 5
`
`A.Yes.
`
`power supply operates; right?
`explaining how a typical pulsed
`Q.So we can agree that Wang is
`
`Phase
`Maintenance
`Wang, Fig. 6, IPR2014-578, Ex. 1008 (with annotations)
`
`Phase
`Ignition
`
`•Dr. Hartsoughadmits Wang’s electrical
`
`the ‘775 patent is showing”
`pulses are “exactly what Figure 5 of
`
`Applied Prior Art: Wang
`
`

`
`14
`
`(claims 15 and 30)
`•Whether the method claims require a specific order
`
`(claims 1, 36 and 37)
`•Whether Wang’s anode and cathode form a gap
`
`one another (claim 1)
`•Whether Wang’s anode and cathode are adjacentto
`Claims
`Issues Raised by Patent Owner Related to Independent
`
`

`
`15
`
`‘775 Patent, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1001
`
`Representative Independent Claims 1 and 15
`The ’775 Patent
`
`

`
`16
`
`cathodethat are “adjacent” to one
`(with annotations showing anodeand
`Wang, Figure 1, IPR2014-578, Ex. 1008
`
`another and forming “gap”)
`
`see also HartsoughDepoTr. at 22:22-
`‘775 Patent, IPR2014-604, Ex. 1028; ;
`Dr. Hartsough’sannotation of “gap” in
`
`25, Ex. 1030
`
`HartsoughDepoTr. at 75:23-76:8,
`IPR2014-578, Ex. 1029; see also
`“adjacent” includes purple region,
`Dr. Hartsough’sinterpretation of
`
`Ex. 1030
`
`•Wang’s anode and cathode form a gap
`•Wang’s anode and cathode are adjacent to one another
`IndependentClaims 1, 36 and 37
`Wang’s Anode and Cathode are Adjacent and Form a Gap
`
`

`
`17
`
`HartsoughDepo. at 20:14-21.3, IPR2014-578, Ex. 1030
`
`A. Yeah.
`Q. That’s what you meant by “edge” earlier?
`A. It could also be those distances.
`Q. Show me where all of the gaps… Why don’t you do it in black…
`
`HartsoughDepo. at 75:23-76:8, IPR2014-578, Ex 1030
`
`A. Yes.
`Q. So are they adjacent within the context of the '775 claims?
`A. In that depiction, there are portions that are adjacent.
`
`Q. I'll pose my question again: Is the anode and cathode
`
`depicted in Exhibit 1029 adjacent to one another?
`
`IndependentClaims 1, 36 and 37
`Wang’s Anode and Cathode are Adjacent and Form a Gap
`
`

`
`18
`
`HartsoughDec. at ¶ 61, IPR2014-578 (Ex. 2006)
`Patent Owner’s Response at p. 22, IPR2014-578 citing
`
`‘775 Patent at 5:19-20, IPR2014-578 (Ex. 2006)
`Patent Owner’s Response at p. 31, IPR2014-578 citing
`
`•Both “gaps” are about 10 cm apart
`IndependentClaims 1, 36 and 37
`Wang’s Anode and Cathode are Adjacent and Form a Gap
`
`

`
`19
`
`Bravman Dep. 56:25-58:2, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1030
`
`would also be []proximate.
`are []proximate, the[n] the cathode and substrate
`closer to the cathode. So the anode and cathode
`at least in some instances the substrate being even
`disclosure … the geometry described in Wang has
`
`A. … [M]y opinion is that it is met by the Wang
`
`of cross-examination.
`MR. FAHMI: Objection, form. Objection. Beyond the scope
`
`Q.What is –what is your opinion regarding whether that
`A.Yes. …
`
`limitation is met?
`
`substrate that is position []proximate to the cathode?
`voltage supply that applies bias voltage to a
`
`Q. Do you recall being asked about the limitation of
`
`’775 Patent, Figure 1, IPR2014-578, Ex. 1001
`
`(with annotations showing anodeand
`
`cathode)
`
`•Wang’s substrate and cathode are proximate to one another
`IndependentClaims 1 and 15
`Wang’s Substrate is ProximateTo the Cathode
`
`

`
`20
`
`(interposing objection omitted)
`HartsoughTr. 87:6-18, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1030
`
`A.Yes.
`
`Q. And that's an embodiment of Claim
`A. In that embodiment, yeah.
`
`15; right?
`
`field will already be on; right?
`permanent magnet, so the magnetic
`Q. Because, as we said, Figure 2 has a
`A.Correct.
`
`of a magnetic field; right?
`have to occur before the generation
`step of ionizing a feed gas does not
`Q. In Claim 15 of the '775 patent, the
`
`“generating magnetic field”
`
`•Dr. Hartsoughadmits “ionizing a feed gas” can occur after
`IndependentClaims 15 and 30
`Method Claims Do Not Require a Specific Order
`
`

`
`21
`
`13A, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1001
`’775 Patent, Figures 12A and
`
`“generating magnetic field”
`
`•‘775 Patent itself teaches “ionizing a feed gas” can occur after
`IndependentClaims 15 and 30
`Method Claims Do Not Require a Specific Order
`
`

`
`22
`
`•One skilled in the art would have combined the prior art despite
`
`physical differences
`
`•Patent Owner argues the references would not have been
`
`combined due to physical differences
`
`combine the prior art
`increasing plasma density and it would have been obvious to
`•Applied prior art all directed to achieving the same purpose of
`
`Prior Art
`A Person of Ordinary Skill Would Have Combined the
`
`

`
`23
`
`IPR2014-578, Ex. 1003
`Kudryavtsev, Abstract,
`Kdd
`
`t
`
`t
`
`Abbt
`
`IPR2014-578, Ex. 1002
`Mozgrin, p. 400,
`Mozgrinp400
`
`IPR2014-578, Ex. 1008
`Wang, Abstract,
`
`Using Pulses
`Prior Art All Directed to Increasing Plasma Density
`
`

`
`24
`
`Mozgrinat 409, IPR2014-578, Ex. 1002
`
`Petition at p. 53, IPR2014-578, citing DeVito Decl. ¶190 (Ex. 1011)
`“As taught in Mozgrin, high density plasma is desirable because it results
`
`in a high etch rate.”
`
`•Undisputed that high plasma density results in high etch rate
`High Etch Rate
`High Plasma Density Desirable Because It Results in
`
`

`
`25
`
`(interposing objection omitted)
`Hartsough‘155 Dep. at 49:20-24, IPR2014-578, Ex. 1030
`
`would be motivated, to increase the sputter etching rate; right?
`Q. So in –in general, it’s desirable, and the person of ordinary skill
`
`A. Yes.
`
`…
`
`Increase the Sputter Etching Rate
`Would Have Been Motivated to Combine Prior Art To
`Patent Owner’s Expert Admits One Skilled In the Art
`
`

`
`26
`
`Kudryavtsevat 34, IPR2014-578, Ex. 1003
`
`References When Pulsed Plasma Generation Occurs
`Prior Art Provides Motivation to Combine Prior Art
`
`

`
`27
`
`Mozgrinat p. 401, IPR2014-578, Ex. 1002
`
`Different Experimental Systems
`Prior Art, In Fact, Combined the Prior Art in Physically
`
`

`
`28
`
`Bravman Declaration at ¶74, IPR2014-578, Ex. 1031
`
`•One skilled in the art would be able to modify
`
`•Differences highlighted by Patent Owner are routine variables
`
`•Such alleged differences are inconsequential
`
`Reasons Not To Combine Prior Art Without Merit
`Patent Owner’s Reliance on Physical Differences As
`
`

`
`29
`
`(interposing objection omitted)
`HartsoughTr. 152:9-18, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1030
`
`skill of a person of –of ordinary skill in the art.
`A.… It wouldn’t be –it –it wouldn’t be beyond the
`
`supply with a pulsed DC supply; right? …
`skill would not be able to combine a constant DC
`Q. So it’s not your position that a person of ordinary
`
`Supplies
`Patent Owner’s Expert On the Combination of Power
`
`

`
`30
`
`for a particular intended purpose (claims 4, 5 and 9)
`•Whether Wang teaches choosing rise time and volume
`
`(claims 21, 24 and 33)
`•Whether Wang teaches a substantially uniform plasma
`
`(claims 2 and 18)
`•Whether Wang teaches a quasi-static electric field
`
`constant power (claims 16 and 17)
`•Whether Wang teaches a constant voltage or
`Dependent Claims
`Issues Raised by Patent Owner Related to
`
`

`
`
`
`31
`
`5
`
`Ex. 1001 (with annotations)
`‘775 Patent, Fig. 5, IPR2014-578,
`
`23.5225.5::SS5\mR-Eemmn=mat£§&m?
`
`<oaTS.c..
`
`
`
`3.50V‘Z6.._.I
`
`
`
`
`
`2.209e..._....x_.o.?
`
`...o>>oo_
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`.a§-§..Efimcou:.25..om_o=o>Eflmcou:£04
`
`power”
`both“constant voltage” and “constant
`
`−However, region annotated in blue shows
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`mkofi2.3E_o9.9.o::c.569..m>m»>o_._I
`
`voltage) to hold constant
`one variable (power, current or
`
`
`
`
`
`._oEmtau.._m»>oo:m_o_o_._o>mco
`
`
`
`Eotcou_o_o;2Amm9._o>
`
`v_u_o_S2:mcomtmmmc._m:»>OE9.on_I
`
`−Patent Owner asserts one must pick
`Claims 16 and 17
`
`Phase
`Maintenance
`
`Phase
`Ignition
`
`
`
`wu:u:wnfi.m%.u._.»__n.w_%_.__..__m_N:.0:.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Wang Teaches Constant Voltage and Constant Power
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`._o>>on_Efimcou_o:ummu=o>—:U—m:OUmm;uum._.m:u>>
`
`

`
`32
`
`Ex. 1001 (with annotations)
`‘775 Patent, Fig. 5, IPR2014-578,
`
`‘
`
`Phase
`Maintenance
`
`Phase
`Ignition
`
`Ex. 1008 (with annotations)
`Wang, Fig. 6, IPR2014-578,
`
`(interposing objection omitted)
`HartsoughTr. 138:1-8, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1030
`In the --in the --what's shown in Figure 6, yes.
`
`A.
`
`quasi-static electric field; right?
`would meet the '775 patent's definition of a
`longer than the collision time for electrons, that
`If the region between T5 and T6 in Figure 5 is
`
`Q.
`
`−However, power pulse width corresponds to
`
`constant voltage region in blue
`
`−Patent Owner argues comparison of power
`Claims 2 and 18
`
`pulse width with collision time is improper
`
`Quasi-static Electric Field Taught by Wang
`
`

`
`33
`
`Revised Petition, p. 47, IPR2014-578, Paper No. 9
`
`Wang, 5:45-48, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1008
`
`50 μs >>0.188 μs
`
`gas particles.”
`electric field variation that is much greater than the collision time for electrons with neutral
`
`‘775 Patent, 7:43-46, IPR2014-00578, Ex. 1008
`
`−“By quasi-static electric field we mean an electric field that has a characteristic time of
`
`−Wang teaches claimed “quasi-static electric field”
`Claims 2 and 18
`Quasi-static Electric Field Taught by Wang
`
`

`
`34
`
`88
`77
`55
`
`44
`11
`00
`22
`RR
`PP
`
`II
`
`11
`11
`
`t
`
`Petitioner’s Reply at p. 11, IPR2014-578
`
`ll
`
`RR
`
`’’
`
`tiitii
`
`PP
`
`−However, magnet rotates and plasma is
`
`uniform over time
`
`plasma (HDP) region 42 is not uniform
`
`−Patent Owner argues high density
`Claims 21, 24 and 33
`
`Wang Teaches Substantially Uniform Plasma
`
`

`
`35
`
`’775 Patent, IPR2014-578, Ex. 1001
`
`−Patent Owner argues references do not teach choosing rise time or volume to achieve
`Claims 4, 5 and 9
`
`increased ionization or etch rate.
`
`Ionization Rate/Etch Rate
`Wang Chose Rise Time and Volume to Increase
`
`

`
`36
`
`Wang, 1:5-8, IPR2014-578, Ex. 1008
`
`(interposing objection omitted; emphasis added)
`Hartsough‘184 Dep, 88:19 –89:6, IPR2014-578, Ex. 1032
`
`in the low-density state, the rate would increase.
`So increase --increase from the rate of ionization
`different rate of ionization between the two states.
`It indicates an increase --an --it indicates a
`
`A.
`
`of ionization?
`does that indicate a quick increase in the rate
`if you have a quick increase in the plasma density,
`applied to the weakly-ionized plasma,
`
`Q.When the voltage --when the increased voltage is
`
`−Wang teaches choosing experimental conditions that lead to increased plasma density
`
`−However, Patent Owner’s expert admits quick increase in plasma density leads to
`Claims 4, 5 and 9
`
`increased ionization rate
`
`Ionization Rate/Etch Rate
`Wang Chose Rise Time and Volume to Increase
`
`

`
`37
`
`IPR2014-604, Paper No. 9
`
`IPR2014-578, Paper No. 13
`
`•All disputed claims of the ‘775 patent are invalid in view of the
`
`following combination of cited references
`
`Conclusion
`
`

`
`Trial No. IPR2014-00604
`Petitioners’ Demonstrative Exhibits for Oral Argument
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`/David L. Cavanaugh/
`David L. Cavanaugh
`Registration No. 36,476
`WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
`HALE AND DORR LLP
`1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
`Washington, D.C. 20006
`david.cavanaugh@wilmerhale.com
`Tel.: 202-663-6000
`Fax: 202-663-6363
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: May 20, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`Trial No. IPR2014-00604
`Petitioners’ Demonstrative Exhibits for Oral Argument
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on May 20, 2015, I caused a true and correct copy of the
`
`foregoing materials:
`
`(cid:120) Petitioners’ Demonstrative Exhibits for Oral Argument
`
`to be served via e-mail, as previously agreed by the parties, on the following
`
`attorneys of record:
`
`
`
`Tarek Fahmi
`84 W. Santa Clara Street, Suite 550
`San Jose, CA 95113
`Tarek.fahmi@ascendalaw.com
`
`
`
`Dr. Gregory J. Gonsalves
`2216 Beacon Lane
`Falls Church, VA 22043
`(571) 419-7252
`gonsalves@gonsalveslawfirm.com
`
`
`
` /Yung-Hoon Ha/
`
` Yung-Hoon Ha
`
` Registration No. 56,368

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket